Supreme Court fixes Monday for Atiku’s appeal against Tinubu

The Supreme Court has fixed Monday, October 23, for judgment in the appeal filed by Atiku Abubakar, Presidential Candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), to challenge the verdict of the Presidential Tribunal, which affirmed the victory of President Bola Tinubu.

The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) had declared Tinubu winner of the February 25 election.

But Atiku, who came second in the election, had headed for the court, which struck out his suit.

In bis appeal before the highest court in the land, Atiku filed a 35-ground notice of appeal, stating that the tribunal in the judgment delivered by Justice Haruna Tsammani “committed a grave error.”

The Notice of Appeal filed by Atiku’s lead counsel, Chris Uche, SAN, prayed the Supreme Court to set aside the whole findings and conclusions of the Tribunal on the grounds that they “did not represent the true picture of the grounds of his petition”.

Amongst others, the former Vice President maintained that the Tribunal erred in law when it failed to nullify the presidential election on the grounds of non-compliance with the Electoral Act, 2022, when by the evidence before the tribunal, the Independent National Electoral Commission conducted the election based on grave and gross misrepresentation contrary to the principles of the Electoral Act 2022, based on the “doctrine of legitimate expectation.”

However, following the outcome of the certificate suit he instituted against Tinubu in the US, Atiku urged the Supreme Court to allow him to present fresh evidence to back his claim that Tinubu forged the document he submitted to INEC..

He said presenting forged documents by any candidate is a grave constitutional issue that must be discouraged.

“Presenting forged documents by any candidate, especially by a candidate for the highest office in the land, is a very grave constitutional issue that must not be encouraged, ” he said.

Tinubu had urged the Supreme Court to dismiss the application, describing it as a crass abuse of court processes.

But in his response on the point of law, Atiku urged the court to jettison technicality and grant his application.

He argued that the issue of merit ought not to be determined or pronounced upon at the interlocutory stage.